Do you need a website, personal blog? or Just want to learn how to make one?

Some time fate takes over design, and Mr Kerry found just that with a sleep of the tong. When asked by a reporter at a press briefing, what may save Syria from an imminent USA attack; he thoughtlessly said something that was not the plan of the scriptwriter to war. Mr Kerry may be regretting for saying Assads surrender of chemical stocks to international authority will save him from an attack, but his words was immediately taken by Russia, who floated the idea to Syria and they gladly accepted the offer. Iran and china also supported the idea, so for now, a sigh of relief for the ordinary Syrians, but how long that will stay remains to be seen. Today, the French have circulated a draft statement for a tough resolution at the UN requiring Syria to disclose and hand over all stockpiles or face serious consequence. The wording is carefully drafted to give the warmongers possible excuse to attack Syria, as disclosure of stockpiles is subjective: The USA can say that Syria is hiding some of its chemical weapon even if they did not hide anything. We have the perfect example from Iraq, when Saddam was accused of hiding his stockpiles of chemicals, but in reality there was none to be found, and he still got bombed.

Today, as suspected, the Russian did not agree to the draft resolution, and as of now, division remains at the Security Council. The main sticking point was that France wanted to invoke Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, making any resolution legally binding and enforceable by military action. Russia, the main backer of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad, opposed the French-drafted resolution and had been expected to propose a weaker Security Council statement, which are largely symbolic statements on the chemical arms crisis. The serious consequences are not acceptable to Russia, as this will be abused to legally attack Syria without the need for UN authorization. The world has changed since Iraq and Libya. The west ploy and tricks of wording are well known by the Russian, and they will not fall in to this trap again. In any case, it is absurd that Assad’s forces would have used the Chemicals weapon as reported, because it knows that USA is constantly at their back for an excuse to topple his regime. It is now becoming clear from various reports that some of the pictures and videos posted on the net were fake. Russia says the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) has confirmed that the videos and photos purporting to show the victims of a chemical attack near the Syrian capital, Damascus, were fabricated. The US administration has been using the footage and the photos in question to lobby for a military strike on Syria. In reality, let’s not forget that one of the war’s objectives, which were stated openly by both Obama and John Kerry, was to send a message to Iran - What was that supposed to mean? After finishing with Syria then they are going to turn their attention to change regime or destroying Iran or occupying Iran.

Iran suffered a very long history of Western domination and interference in its affairs. The British and American instigated a coup in 1953 against the Mosaddeq government, which the CIA openly admits today. In that coup they stopped the Iranians from getting sovereignty over their wealth and nationalizing their oil and they installed the puppet, the Shah, who turned Iran at the time to be the biggest military base for the United States of America and to loot the Iranian people’s wealth.

The same thing happened to the Iraqi when they involved them in a war against the revolution of Iran, who managed to kick out these imperialist puppets. And they suffered for eight years, both countries, from a designed war to weaken both of them.Then they (US) occupied Iraq of course after the war in 1991 and then again in 2003. Millions of Iraqis died there. What is happening now from a political strategic point of view is the desperation of the US imperialists to control the area - militarily now. They cannot compete economically with the Chinese or with the BRICS or even with the EU. Now they want to sustain their presence worldwide with military force. How can the United States even start to mention that chemical weapons usage is their red line when they have been and they have probably used illegal weapons more than any other regime in the world?

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed by the Kaagoj.com Bloggers and those providing comments are
theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of the Kaagoj.com or any employee thereof.
Kaagoj.com is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the
Bloggers. You'll find terms and conditions and privacy policyhere.